Senate Version of FAA bill will destroy model aviation
03-16-2016, 08:00 PM
#101
03-16-2016, 08:30 PM
#102
03-17-2016, 01:08 AM
#103
Just listened to all of the youtube file SunDevilPilot posted a link to. I was astounded to hear how little the people on the panel actually know about aviation in general and R/C in particular. The opposition to the NH bill not only had their "ducks in a row" but also addressed specific points that needed to be looked at. This is just what the AMA board and members need to tell the four senators that literally threw together that similar bill in the senate. They basically are doing a "knee-jerk" response to what they are seeing in the news and not what's actually happening in their states
03-17-2016, 03:17 AM
#104
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
That is exactly what the AMA is doing at the national level, and in some cases the local level. It's important to let your local leader members and AVPs know about any pending state bills or proposed legislation so that they can take steps to address it. The folks in District 2, NY specifically, were mobilized last year by AVP Eric Williams and they did a fantastic job dealing with these exact issues.
03-17-2016, 10:07 AM
#105
Just read through all the amendments on the Senate Committee page. Both the 400 foot limit and the knowledge test are still in the bill. Only amendment I read that even touched on our issues was one that allows faculty, staff, and students at institutions of higher education (as defined by a section of federal law) to fly at AMA fields for educational or research purposes w/o FAA approval. Requires AMA and local club approval.
03-17-2016, 12:10 PM
#106
Just read through all the amendments on the Senate Committee page. Both the 400 foot limit and the knowledge test are still in the bill. Only amendment I read that even touched on our issues was one that allows faculty, staff, and students at institutions of higher education (as defined by a section of federal law) to fly at AMA fields for educational or research purposes w/o FAA approval. Requires AMA and local club approval.
03-17-2016, 12:19 PM
#107
http://www.commerce.senate.gov/publi...orization-bill
As for the knowledge test, I'm fully in favor. They do include language that says "The Administrator may waive the requirements of this section for operators of aircraft weighing less than 0.55 pounds or for operators under the age of 13 operating the unmanned aircraft system under the supervision of an adult as determined by the Administrator."
03-17-2016, 12:52 PM
#108
It has been voted out of committee, here's their link and the amendments approved/disapproved:
http://www.commerce.senate.gov/publi...orization-bill
As for the knowledge test, I'm fully in favor. They do include language that says "The Administrator may waive the requirements of this section for operators of aircraft weighing less than 0.55 pounds or for operators under the age of 13 operating the unmanned aircraft system under the supervision of an adult as determined by the Administrator."
http://www.commerce.senate.gov/publi...orization-bill
As for the knowledge test, I'm fully in favor. They do include language that says "The Administrator may waive the requirements of this section for operators of aircraft weighing less than 0.55 pounds or for operators under the age of 13 operating the unmanned aircraft system under the supervision of an adult as determined by the Administrator."
And then we had these big gassers, which didn't muffle that engine noise any better. And they would fly fast, and low. All I know is this: If I go out to a flying field to watch, and someone brings in a nice scale model with a 4-cylinder engine, I want to HEAR that engine and prop. NOT some LOUD warbird with a two-stroke gas engine and NO muffler. I know of at least one field that had to shut down due to noise complaints, and that had nothing to do with the FAA.
All of this makes me wonder if the testing and licensing requirements would serve to reduce some of this behavior. It may not, but at least it would put a little more value into the hobby. Because right now, anything with a radio can be purchased at Wal-Mart, and there is NO accountability. You buy the toy, and do what you want with it. And it has been that way with RC for the last several decades. Needless to say, I was a little shocked when I learned that all I needed was an AMA card and club membership to get into the hobby. Well, not even a club membership for some fields. Yes, I had some instruction because it was highly encouraged. But after that, there were essentially no rules because the models I had really weren't capable of breaking them anyway.
Last edited by NorfolkSouthern; 03-21-2016 at 05:10 PM.
03-17-2016, 01:55 PM
#109
I can relate this to you, franklin_m: I remember a time when a guy at a club flew a Stick. It had a 4-stroke OS Max, and no muffler. He would fly that plan all day. Bring it in, refuel, and take off. All day Saturday, and all day Sunday, when the field was busiest. Plus, any other day of the week he could come. There he would be, flying that stick with the LOUD 4-stroke. Anybody else who wanted to fly, would simply have to put up with the noise and his antics. He was not the most considerate club member on the planet, but he paid his club dues I guess. Luckily for the club, the place was a good 5 miles from the nearest house. None the less, the noise was deafening!
And then we had these big gassers, which didn't muffle that engine noise any better. And they would fly fast, and low. All I know is this: If I go out to a flying field to watch, and someone brings in a nice scale model with a 4-cylinder engine, I want to HEAR that engine and prop. NOT some LOUD warbird with a two-stroke gas engine and NO muffler. I know of at least one field that had to shut down due to noise complaints, and that had nothing to do with the FAA.
All of this makes me wonder if the testing and licensing requirements would serve to reduce some of this behavior. It may not, but at least it would put a little more value into the hobby. Because right now, anything with a radio can be purchased at Wal-Mart, and there is NO accountability. You buy the toy, and do what you want with it. And it has been that way with RC for the last several decades. Needless to say, I was a little shocked when I learned that all I needed was an AMA card and club membership to get into the hobby. Well, not even a club membership for some fields. Yes, I had some instruction because it was highly encouraged. But after that, there were essentially no rules because the models I had really weren't capable of breaking them anyway.
And then we had these big gassers, which didn't muffle that engine noise any better. And they would fly fast, and low. All I know is this: If I go out to a flying field to watch, and someone brings in a nice scale model with a 4-cylinder engine, I want to HEAR that engine and prop. NOT some LOUD warbird with a two-stroke gas engine and NO muffler. I know of at least one field that had to shut down due to noise complaints, and that had nothing to do with the FAA.
All of this makes me wonder if the testing and licensing requirements would serve to reduce some of this behavior. It may not, but at least it would put a little more value into the hobby. Because right now, anything with a radio can be purchased at Wal-Mart, and there is NO accountability. You buy the toy, and do what you want with it. And it has been that way with RC for the last several decades. Needless to say, I was a little shocked when I learned that all I needed was an AMA card and club membership to get into the hobby. Well, not even a club membership for some fields. Yes, I had some instruction because it was highly encouraged. But after that, there were essentially no rules because the models I had really weren't capable of breaking them anyway.
Now add to that the stabilization systems, auto pilots, and other technological advancements that lower the skill requirement even further.
Yep, I'm all for raising the bar, and it appears so is Congress.
03-17-2016, 05:07 PM
#110
Searching the news, it appears that AOPA, AUVSI, and EAA are please with the legislation out of the committee.
AOPA: http://www.aopa.org/News-and-Video/A...FULL-US-SENATE
AUVSI: http://www.uasmagazine.com/articles/...uas-provisions
EAA: http://www.eaa.org/en/eaa/eaa-news-a...eauthorization
AOPA: http://www.aopa.org/News-and-Video/A...FULL-US-SENATE
AUVSI: http://www.uasmagazine.com/articles/...uas-provisions
EAA: http://www.eaa.org/en/eaa/eaa-news-a...eauthorization
03-18-2016, 11:13 AM
#112
Agree. My point was that there's been a lot of public statements about MOUs etc. between AMA and these groups, and it doesn't appear that is making a big difference. Those groups are happy with the law as written.
03-19-2016, 10:01 AM
#113
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Orange County,
CA
Posts: 5,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Senate just published their final bill that will go to vote. It retains the 400 foot altitude cap and testing requirements for model aircraft operations. See Section 2129.
Hopefully if this passes the full Senate these provisions will not survive the Conference committee process where the Senate and Houses versions are reconciled into a final Bill
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-...8C075B8DA13ABA
Hopefully if this passes the full Senate these provisions will not survive the Conference committee process where the Senate and Houses versions are reconciled into a final Bill
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-...8C075B8DA13ABA
03-21-2016, 04:22 AM
#114
Why is this not on the jet, giant scale, pattern, or sailplane forums? I have sometimes seen FAA news on the jet forums, less often on the giant scale, and pattern forums. But never on the sailplane forums. I started to post on the classic pattern forum but have not posted there in years so I didn't.
03-21-2016, 06:06 AM
#115
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Orange County,
CA
Posts: 5,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why is this not on the jet, giant scale, pattern, or sailplane forums? I have sometimes seen FAA news on the jet forums, less often on the giant scale, and pattern forums. But never on the sailplane forums. I started to post on the classic pattern forum but have not posted there in years so I didn't.
03-21-2016, 06:18 AM
#116
Keep in mind that RCU is not -GASP- the only Internet forum where RC hobby is discussed. Flying Giants has several threads going regarding the IMAC and Giant Scale world, RC Groups has multiple threads in a variety of sailplane forums, and the pattern email list server that is their most common means of communication also discusses this topic. As shocking as it might be to find out, there is a great big world out there beyond RC Universe.
